| 1. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carlsson, Mattias, et al.
(författare)
-
A Ham1p-Dependent Mechanism and Modulation of the Pyrimidine Biosynthetic Pathway can both Confer Resistance to 5-Fluorouracil in Yeast
- 2013
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 8:10, s. e52094-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is an anticancer drug and pyrimidine analogue. A problem in 5-FU therapy is acquired resistance to the drug. To find out more about the mechanisms of resistance, we screened a plasmid library in yeast for genes that confer 5-FU resistance when overexpressed. We cloned five genes: CPA1, CPA2, HMS1, YAE1 and YJL055W. CPA1 and CPA2 encode a carbamoyl phosphate synthase involved in arginine biosynthesis and HMS1 a helix-loop-helix transcription factor. Our results suggest that CPA1, CPA2, and HMS1 confer 5-FU resistance by stimulating pyrimidine biosynthesis. Thus, they are unable to confer 5-FU resistance in a ura2 mutant, and inhibit the uptake and incorporation into RNA of both uracil and 5-FU. In contrast, YAE1 and YJL055W confer 5-FU resistance in a ura2 mutant, and selectively inhibit incorporation into RNA of 5-FU but not uracil. YAE1 is the strongest resistance gene, but it partially depends on YJL055W for its function. This suggests that YAE1 and YJL055W function together in a novel mechanism for detoxification of 5-FU and other pyrimidine analogs. Yae1p belongs to a small protein family with only two members, which are conserved in all eukaryotes examined. One of the human homologs, TAOS1, is overexpressed in oral carcinomas.
|
|
| 3. |
- Nordberg, Niklas, et al.
(författare)
-
The Histone Demethylase Activity of Rph1 is Not Essential for Its Role in the Transcriptional Response to Nutrient Signaling
- 2014
-
Ingår i: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Rph1 and Gis1 are two related yeast zinc finger proteins that function as downstream effectors in the Ras/PKA, TOR and Sch9 nutrient signaling pathways. Both proteins also contain JmjC histone demethylase domains, but only Rph1 is known to be an active enzyme, demethylating lysine 36 of histone H3. We have studied to what extent the demethylase activity of Rph1 contributes to its role in nutrient signaling by performing gene expression microarray experiments on a yeast strain containing a catalytically inactive allele of RPH1. We find that the enzymatic activity of Rph1 is not essential for its role in growth phase dependent gene regulation. However, the ability of Rph1 to both activate and repress transcription is partially impaired in the active site mutant, indicating that the demethylase activity may enhance its function in vivo. Consistent with this, we find that the Rph1 mutation and a deletion of the histone H3 methylase Set2 affect the same target genes in opposite directions. Genes that are differentially expressed in the Rph1 mutant are also enriched for binding of Rpd3, a downstream effector in silencing, to their promoters. The expression of some subtelomeric genes and genes involved in sporulation and meiosis are also affected by the mutation, suggesting a role for Rph1-dependent demethylation in regulating these genes. A small set of genes are more strongly affected by the active site mutation, indicating a more pronounced role for the demethylase activity in their regulation by Rph1.
|
|
